CONVERT MTH PROTOSOUNDS TO ERR / TMCC QUESTION

Like others on this forum, I have converted several Protosound engines to TMCC using the ERR Cruise Commander and Cruise Lite along with Railsounds. It's easy to do, instructions are simple to follow. Just need to know how to solder and read diagrams. 

Others, I am sure will comment on this as well.

RAY

Sure, the PS/1 models are frequently very good candidates for conversion.  Obviously, I choose the cruise option for the small amount of extra money, the effort is the same for cruise or non-cruise.

Another bonus is many PS/1 models also have track powered smoke which works perfectly with the ERR TMCC upgrade products.

Most of my "high end" fleet is MTH Premier proto one locomotives that I converted to TMCC with Electric railroad products. Go for the cruise commander rather than the DC commander. The higher up front cost will be forgotten once the you experience joy of operating with cruise.

The first one may seem daunting, but after that, the job becomes easy.

IMO you are upgrading to a DCC basic board set. I'm not bashing now, as the set is quite capable, expandable, etc. It handles the loads with ease. Very good board. I like it more than some DCC boards!

IMO you would get more for the money with the MTH upgrade kits.

Now that is dependent on what system you already are using! If you have TMCC, than I fully understand and agree with the move. If you are going to go full out and add sounds, smoke, etc., and already have DCS, than I would say get the MTH kit!

I'm sure you already know all that Jim, but you did ask for comments! It's for others who need to decide as well.

Joe certainly has a valid point.  For diesels, it's pretty much a wash as far as pricing.  However, for TMCC steam conversions, to get the PS/3 functionality, you'll be spending quite a bit more.  Of course, the good part is you'll be sending some of it to me for the parts to make it happen.  I refer specifically to the Super-Chuffer and the Chuff-Generator!

I actually did not know that the diesel boards are less expensive John!

Not a wash by any stretch.  PS-3 kit $200.  ERR Cruise CDR $120, plus $85 RS and that is the old price.  Plus the HLs need replacement.  Luckily PS-1 couplers work with TMCC or else that is an extra $10 each.  So I assume it is about $40 more now a days.  But yep easy conversion to ERR.  G

GGG, what are HLs that you said need replacing.  I have a whole fleet of Proto 1s that have never been out of the box that I want to convert, as I am building a large layout.  I was one of those collectors who threw a lot of money down a hole.  The sound boards are now $89.95, and the  Cruise Commander is $129.95.   Is the converstion to ERR TMCC easier than to Proto 3.  I have originally TIUs that I could upgrade or buy new ones.  The layout I am building is large and I was not pleased with the performance of the original Proto 2 on large loops before, where the signal would drop etc.  And star wiring on a large layout is not ideal.

Headlights in PS1 or PS/2 are 6V bulbs, so you need to use 12V bulbs or upgrade to LED's for the TMCC upgrade.

I'd have to say, though some are going to object, that the conversion of most diesels with the PS/3 kit is probably a little more work than for a TMCC upgrade of a diesel.  However, neither needs to a daunting task.

Just a question, I just did a ERR upgrade to a PS1 steam, for me it was surprisingly easy.  I have remote rear couplers and the smoke unit is remote controlled as well.  How much more involved is the MTH upgrade?  I am a MTRC member, or whatever it is called, so i think I get a little discount on the price.

thanks

Thanks John for the help.  I am going to first try it on a dead engine, so if I mess up, no foul. 

For MTH PS-1 Diesels headlights are 1.5V.  For MTH Steam RK usually HL are 18V track power and Tender is 1.5V. For PR MTH PS-1 Steam with a CV board, Engine are 6V just like PS-2 engines.  But tender still 1.5V.  G

I hope someday there might be a video posted of one of these conversions. That would be a huge benefit to us electrically challenged! 

Tony H posted:

Just a question, I just did a ERR upgrade to a PS1 steam, for me it was surprisingly easy.  I have remote rear couplers and the smoke unit is remote controlled as well.  How much more involved is the MTH upgrade?  I am a MTRC member, or whatever it is called, so i think I get a little discount on the price.

thanks

Tony, did you install a new sound board, or just do without sound?

Tony H posted:

Just a question, I just did a ERR upgrade to a PS1 steam, for me it was surprisingly easy.  I have remote rear couplers and the smoke unit is remote controlled as well.  How much more involved is the MTH upgrade?  I am a MTRC member, or whatever it is called, so i think I get a little discount on the price.

You only did half the job.   In order to get realistic chuffing smoke, you have to do more work with the TMCC upgrades, that's done for you with the PS/3 upgrade.  TMCC steam upgrades is why I sell the Super-Chuffer II and the Chuff-Generator.

Miles, I did not add sound.  Since it was my first attempt, I wanted to go slow.  I guess I could add it down the road.  Also, since it was just a RailKing, I did not want to add too much $$.  It is an SP Daylight, got it basically for free, knowing it did not work.  

I am back with more questions.  I talked to a local guy here in Atlanta about converting MTH Steam and he told me not to do it because of the work and cost involved in insulating the die cast tenders.  Then I asked him about A-B-A Diesels where both A units are powered and he said I needed two boards.  Is this true?  I also asked, "well what about just making the slave powered unit a dummy?"  He said that was too much for the one powered unit to pull?  Really, seven cars and two dummies?  I am considering just liquidating all the PS 1 engines and buying PS2 PS3 or TMCC or Legacy.  It seems like less money in the long run.

As usual, someone that doesn't know what they're talking about!  Insulating the tender shell for the antenna is not that difficult, I do it all the time!  I just use Kapton tape all around the perimeter and use nylon screws to replace the steel screws.  Actually, some of the nicer MTH PS/1 steam makes great upgrade units, especially if you already own them!  The 15 minutes to insulate the tender shell is hardly a lot of work, and the cost is four nylon screws and a nickel's worth of Kapton tape!

For the A-B-A, you can obviously make the trailing A into a dummy.  Once again, someone that doesn't seem to know what they're talking about!  Many A-B-A sets were sold with a dummy A and B and one powered unit.  One dual motored diesel should be able to pull that load without much issue unless there's some extreme grades or tight curves on grades.  We routinely pull 40 car freight trains with a single diesel, including grades, they don't miss a beat.

Obviously, you can sell all the PS/1, but you won't get much for them as a rule.  I frequently look for bargain priced PS/1 for upgrades, they're typically a very good value as they're cheap.

Obviously, you can upgrade any of these with PS/3 as well...

Miles W. Rich posted:

I am back with more questions.  I talked to a local guy here in Atlanta about converting MTH Steam and he told me not to do it because of the work and cost involved in insulating the die cast tenders.  Then I asked him about A-B-A Diesels where both A units are powered and he said I needed two boards.  Is this true?  I also asked, "well what about just making the slave powered unit a dummy?"  He said that was too much for the one powered unit to pull?  Really, seven cars and two dummies?  I am considering just liquidating all the PS 1 engines and buying PS2 PS3 or TMCC or Legacy.  It seems like less money in the long run.

 

Like GRJ said, this guy does not know what he is talking about. It's always easier to discourage than to encourage, for some reason.

Insulating the tender body is relatively easy as explained by GRJ.

I have converted many four motor MTH diesel locos to TMCC with ERR Cruise Commanders. Although it was not recommended by ERR, the Cruise Commander handles four motors well. I mount a heat sink on the bridge rectifier with heat transferring epoxy and a computer muffin fan blowing on the triacs and the bridge rectifier. Works great.

In my opinion (take with a grain of salt) I find TMCC upgrades of Premier diesels (or any diesel for that matter) to be easier, at least for me. Steam on the other hand hands down the winner is PS3. It's much cheaper to get all the functionality you expect in a steam locomotive (puffing smoke, 4 chuffs a revolution) with PS3. My locomotive fleet is factory or TMCC upgraded diesels (7 Lionel, 1 MTH Premier) and factory PS2 3V or upgraded PS2 3V MTH Premier steam locomotives (1 upgraded to PS2 3V, the other 2 are factory PS2 3V). I run both TMCC and DCS and I like both equally. If I buy more locomotives in the future (highly unlikely) if diesel they will be or will be upgraded to TMCC, if steam they will be or will be upgraded to DCS. But again this is my crazy way of doing things.

One also has to consider their skill set. I've found upgrading locomotives to be relatively simple, and if one does the work themselves cheaper than selling the locomotive and purchasing a equivalent factory command locomotive. If you have to pay someone to upgrade the locomotive then the cost goes up and it might be more of a wash. 

Not everyone want's to run DCS, so for them TMCC steam will make more sense.   Besides, if you convince everyone to convert to DCS, I can't sell any more Super-Chuffers!

One bonus of using the Super-Chuffer is you get Rule-17 lighting and automatic cab light control.  If you also use the Chuff-Generator, you can add automatic ground lights.

True. I'm just one of the weirdos who runs both, so I can run whatever I want. 

The big factor is cost. It is still much cheaper to do any upgrades yourself vs. paying someone. 

RoyBoy posted:

Miles W. Rich posted:

I am back with more questions.  I talked to a local guy here in Atlanta about converting MTH Steam and he told me not to do it because of the work and cost involved in insulating the die cast tenders.  Then I asked him about A-B-A Diesels where both A units are powered and he said I needed two boards.  Is this true?  I also asked, "well what about just making the slave powered unit a dummy?"  He said that was too much for the one powered unit to pull?  Really, seven cars and two dummies?  I am considering just liquidating all the PS 1 engines and buying PS2 PS3 or TMCC or Legacy.  It seems like less money in the long run.

 

Like GRJ said, this guy does not know what he is talking about. It's always easier to discourage than to encourage, for some reason.

Insulating the tender body is relatively easy as explained by GRJ.

I have converted many four motor MTH diesel locos to TMCC with ERR Cruise Commanders. Although it was not recommended by ERR, the Cruise Commander handles four motors well. I mount a heat sink on the bridge rectifier with heat transferring epoxy and a computer muffin fan blowing on the triacs and the bridge rectifier. Works great.

Just to reinforce what RoyBoy said. I too am running a 4 motored Lionel AA diesel with one Lionel DC LCRU motor driver.  The set is two 18953 NYC Alco PA-1.  I did make a new heat sink out of 4 layers of shim copper soldered together where they mount to the triacs. They stick up above the triacs and fan out to allow air  to circulate between the four layers. The motors in these first Lionel Alcos are the larger 545 cans as opposed to the smaller 385 cans used in most diesels now. I also have a couple  Train America Studios boards where I swapped the 8A triacs out for 15A and though they are not in a loco yet they seem to run 4 motors on the chassis without breaking a sweat.  Plan is to install one in a PS1 Centipede AA and the other in a PS1 Southern F3 AA. I think Roys right it's all about the heat sink.  It usually takes me longer than most claim to install TMCC but it's my hobby and burning time is part of it's purpose.   So Miles, jump in, the first one is the hardest and you will get all the help on the forum that you need.   I did my first a little over two years ago and have now completed twenty eight.  I have not tried to run 4 motors with one MTH PS board they specifically warn against it and it looks harder to make a larger heatsink for their boards           j

I think you'll find that when you get a high load on the Cruise Commander products, you start approaching the heat limitation of the bridge rectifier and not the FET motor drivers.  Note that the MTH products actually heatsink the bridge and not the FET that actually drives the motor.

If you draw, let's say, 4 amps for all the motors.  The bridge rectifier will be dropping 1.4V across each pair of diodes, so that's 5.6 watts of power being dissipated by the regulator.  In free air, the bridge used on those is pretty maxed out at 4 amps, and it's probably got minimal circulation around it.  A useful exercise is to put a 4A resistive load on one of those on the bench and measure the temperature of the bridge, you may be surprised.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

 Note that the MTH products actually heatsink the bridge and not the FET that actually drives the motor.

Have you seen the inside of a G scale Challenger or Big Boy yet? 

Nope.

JohnActon posted:

Just to reinforce what RoyBoy said. I too am running a 4 motored Lionel AA diesel with one Lionel DC LCRU motor driver.  The set is two 18953 NYC Alco PA-1.  I did make a new heat sink out of 4 layers of shim copper soldered together where they mount to the triacs. They stick up above the triacs and fan out to allow air  to circulate between the four layers. The motors in these first Lionel Alcos are the larger 545 cans as opposed to the smaller 385 cans used in most diesels now. 

I have the Santa Fe version of those Alco PAs in an ABA set. I took the easy way out and reversed the wiring in the trailing unit so it starts in reverse. No having to wire to one LCRU (with a harness between units) and no having to create a "lash up" with the remote. Just assign both the same locomotive ID. Starts and runs in the correct direction every time.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

I think you'll find that when you get a high load on the Cruise Commander products, you start approaching the heat limitation of the bridge rectifier and not the FET motor drivers.  Note that the MTH products actually heatsink the bridge and not the FET that actually drives the motor.

If you draw, let's say, 4 amps for all the motors.  The bridge rectifier will be dropping 1.4V across each pair of diodes, so that's 5.6 watts of power being dissipated by the regulator.  In free air, the bridge used on those is pretty maxed out at 4 amps, and it's probably got minimal circulation around it.  A useful exercise is to put a 4A resistive load on one of those on the bench and measure the temperature of the bridge, you may be surprised.

John, I am sinking the bridges also. I discovered that problem almost by accident when I was working on the Alco PA-1.  I ran the set several laps on my test track and was feeling around the heat sink for heat and the triacs were just barely warm yet the bridge was hot enough after less than a minute running with a small load that I could feel the heat radiating even before touching it.  In addition to making a copper sink I started using a hi-tech (Thermal Grizzly) sink compound rather than the cheap stuff. Since adding the copper sinks I have let the AA set run with a 9 car load continuously for about twenty minutes and all seems well.  I looked for a 12A bridge that could fit in the space the 8A does but all I could find are considerably larger. There is room to raise the DCDR  and bend the leads inward on the 12A bridge and get it in. Would require making another copper sink for the triacs though.  I took a break this year from breathing resin core solder fumes to do some painting and build an interior for a dining car. Then there are a couple sailboats I need to clean up and sell soon. Anyone need a 26' sailboat ?    j          

With FET's, the heat generation moved away from the motor control parts to the bridge as they dissipate more power.  The one concern with the Cruise Commander and CC-M is they still heatsink the FET's and not the bridge.

Lou1985 posted:

JohnActon posted:

Just to reinforce what RoyBoy said. I too am running a 4 motored Lionel AA diesel with one Lionel DC LCRU motor driver.  The set is two 18953 NYC Alco PA-1.  I did make a new heat sink out of 4 layers of shim copper soldered together where they mount to the triacs. They stick up above the triacs and fan out to allow air  to circulate between the four layers. The motors in these first Lionel Alcos are the larger 545 cans as opposed to the smaller 385 cans used in most diesels now. 

I have the Santa Fe version of those Alco PAs in an ABA set. I took the easy way out and reversed the wiring in the trailing unit so it starts in reverse. No having to wire to one LCRU (with a harness between units) and no having to create a "lash up" with the remote. Just assign both the same locomotive ID. Starts and runs in the correct direction every time.

Lou,  many ways to skin the horse.  I used the electronics from the second PA in an early Williams FM Trainmaster with Pittman motors and magnatraction.  It wanted those Alco electronics bad. BTW, speaking of harnesses, I made an eight pin harness/ plug to connect the two units from Dupont connectors. I have been sitting on this for two years intending to post the photos of the process of modifying the trucks on the Alcos to accommodate the harness and plugs but I cannot find the pix of the two assembled chassis coupled back to back.  I will go ahead and start a new message thread about making your own wiring harness tonight.                   j

gunrunnerjohn posted:

With FET's, the heat generation moved away from the motor control parts to the bridge as they dissipate more power.  The one concern with the Cruise Commander and CC-M is they still heatsink the FET's and not the bridge.

John, so far all the motor drivers I have worked on all have triacs including the ones in the Alco PAs.  When did they change over to  FET s ? Guessing the newer Legacy boards. Never the less the bridge on the DCDR gets HOT when driving four motors, so I make sinks for then.  All the TAS boards I have worked on have Triacs also. The bridges on them are easier to change out for a 15-20A.  Somewhere along the way they started sinking the bridge on the mounting bracket / heatsink.              Are any, or Which of the DCS boards are Triac vs FET ?     j

""I am back with more questions.  I talked to a local guy here in Atlanta about converting MTH Steam and he told me not to do it because of the work and cost involved in insulating the die cast tenders.  Then I asked him about A-B-A Diesels where both A units are powered and he said I needed two boards.  Is this true?  I also asked, "well what about just making the slave powered unit a dummy?"  He said that was too much for the one powered unit to pull?  Really, seven cars and two dummies?  I am considering just liquidating all the PS 1 engines and buying PS2 PS3 or TMCC or Legacy.  It seems like less money in the long run.""

 The one thing he is right about is the cost.  ERR is now more expensive then a MTH upgrade.  Plus MTH provides far more control of lighting and such especially for diesels.  But, if you prefer TMCC over DCS, then Diesel is the easier conversion.

But since you have DCS why not the DCS conversion instead of the TMCC?  You would be making it the latest DCS product, vice the semi obsolete TMCC??  G

JohnActon posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

With FET's, the heat generation moved away from the motor control parts to the bridge as they dissipate more power.  The one concern with the Cruise Commander and CC-M is they still heatsink the FET's and not the bridge.

John, so far all the motor drivers I have worked on all have triacs including the ones in the Alco PAs.  When did they change over to  FET s ? Guessing the newer Legacy boards. Never the less the bridge on the DCDR gets HOT when driving four motors, so I make sinks for then.  All the TAS boards I have worked on have Triacs also. The bridges on them are easier to change out for a 15-20A.  Somewhere along the way they started sinking the bridge on the mounting bracket / heatsink.              Are any, or Which of the DCS boards are Triac vs FET ?     j

The TMCC stuff mostly used triac drivers.  The DCDR and ACDR, the Odyssey I DCDS switched to FET drivers.

The Cruise Commander uses FET's as well as the CC-M.  The Legacy RCMC also uses FET motor drivers.

Here's the location of the FET drivers on the RCMC.

FWIW, all the PS/2 and PS/3 stuff has FET drivers.